When the decision was made for the United States to enter the First World War, it was not, as President Wilson claimed, “to make the world safe for democracy”, but to protect the nation’s economic stability. The war raged in Europe for three years before America decided to join the cause and change their neutral position. Wilson was always looking for the best option for the US’ economy, not the world’s democracy. And as President of the United States, that is what he should’ve been most occupied with.
At the start of WWI, President Woodrow Wilson had promised that America would stay neutral, being open to trade with all sides. Though this was a diplomatic stance, it was also greatly an economic one. With the ability to trade with everyone during the war, America would not be burning any economic bridges and even have opportunities to trade where there hadn’t been before due to the warring nations not trading with each other. Yet, this stance did not sit well with all of the other countries of the world. Germany announced that their submarines would sink any ship supplying their enemies, which America was, in April 1917. And after their sinking of some American merchant ships, Wilson said that he must stand by the rights of Americans, speaking against Germany. This was, however, an unfair rationale because England had intruded upon some of American merchants’ rights as well.
This can be explained, though, after looking at the United States’ economic stipulations. In 1914, the country was experiencing a serious recession. As said by J.P. Morgan, “Business throughout the country was depressed, farm prices were deflated, unemployment was serious, the heavy industries were working far below capacity, and bank clearings were off.” All in all, America was in an economic rough patch. Although by 1915, war orders or the Allies, specifically England, had stimulated the economy, and by April 1917 over two billion dollars worth of goods had been sold to them. With this war, England had become a greater market for US goods.
It was in America’s best interests to continue using the war to boost its economy. But, if they had stayed out of the war, the possibility arose that all trade with Europe could have been cut off. Thus, entering the war became a smart choice from an economic standpoint. Some may argue that German U-boats sinking US merchant ships brought America to WWI, though it is more likely that the US saw it as the ends to their means of finding a political reason to enter the war to maintain economic gains abroad while solidifying political support at home.
Work Cited
Kennedy, David M., Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas Andrew Bailey. The American Pageant: a History of the Republic. 12th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002. Print.
Zinn, Howard. "War is the Health of the State." A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present. [New ed. New York: HarperCollins, 2003. 350-367. Print.
Wimmer
APUSH wiki
When the decision was made for the United States to enter the First World War, it was not, as President Wilson claimed, “to make the world safe for democracy”, but to protect the nation’s economic stability. The war raged in Europe for three years before America decided to join the cause and change their neutral position. Wilson was always looking for the best option for the US’ economy, not the world’s democracy. And as President of the United States, that is what he should’ve been most occupied with.
At the start of WWI, President Woodrow Wilson had promised that America would stay neutral, being open to trade with all sides. Though this was a diplomatic stance, it was also greatly an economic one. With the ability to trade with everyone during the war, America would not be burning any economic bridges and even have opportunities to trade where there hadn’t been before due to the warring nations not trading with each other. Yet, this stance did not sit well with all of the other countries of the world. Germany announced that their submarines would sink any ship supplying their enemies, which America was, in April 1917. And after their sinking of some American merchant ships, Wilson said that he must stand by the rights of Americans, speaking against Germany. This was, however, an unfair rationale because England had intruded upon some of American merchants’ rights as well.
This can be explained, though, after looking at the United States’ economic stipulations. In 1914, the country was experiencing a serious recession. As said by J.P. Morgan, “Business throughout the country was depressed, farm prices were deflated, unemployment was serious, the heavy industries were working far below capacity, and bank clearings were off.” All in all, America was in an economic rough patch. Although by 1915, war orders or the Allies, specifically England, had stimulated the economy, and by April 1917 over two billion dollars worth of goods had been sold to them. With this war, England had become a greater market for US goods.
It was in America’s best interests to continue using the war to boost its economy. But, if they had stayed out of the war, the possibility arose that all trade with Europe could have been cut off. Thus, entering the war became a smart choice from an economic standpoint. Some may argue that German U-boats sinking US merchant ships brought America to WWI, though it is more likely that the US saw it as the ends to their means of finding a political reason to enter the war to maintain economic gains abroad while solidifying political support at home.
Work Cited
Kennedy, David M., Lizabeth Cohen, and Thomas Andrew Bailey. The American Pageant: a History of the Republic. 12th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2002. Print.
"U.S. Economy in World War I | Economic History Services." EH.Net | Economic History Services. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Mar. 2012. http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/rockoff.wwi.
Zinn, Howard. "War is the Health of the State." A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present. [New ed. New York: HarperCollins, 2003. 350-367. Print.